Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
249
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 20:28:33 -
[1] - Quote
Problem Piracy often revolves around simply blowing up the target ship and sifting through the wreckage. Extracting ransom from an established entity for high value targets is at times workable, but the day to day pirate is often unable to effectively ransom targets due to the immortal nature of capsuleers making "your money or your life" an empty threat, and the tenuous nature of trusting an aggressive entity in an internet video game largely ludicrous.
Idea Add a rightclick option for: "Propose Ransom" to formalize the legitimate business of sticking people up for their cargo or ship.
Y THO? Simply put: ransoms are more interesting than just murdering people, and despite it being a "gamey" system, I believe a formalized form of ransom mechanics would incentivize more individual players and small groups to attempt and accept ransom agreements, where currently they are only seriously considered by larger groups with established trust and for very high value targets.
Use You may "propose ransom" from the rightclick or radial menu for any ship that is currently unable to warp, on which you have a target lock and scram, and which has suffered at least 50% structure damage. You may only propose ransom once every 120 seconds, and if in a fleet this timer is shared for the entire fleet to prevent spam. Additionally, any pod that is unable to warp and has been successfully locked and scrammed may also be the target of a ransom proposal.
Effect Ransom proposals would pop as a notifcation, not a dialogue, from the little notifications clicky button. This is to prevent the mechanic's use as UI spam to win fights against hull tanked vessels and generally to keep it out of the way if the defender is still actively working to win the fight. Skull and crossbones icon, which reads "*Player* Proposes a ransom" You are free to click this notification to enact the ransom window for both parties, or ignore it.
The Ransom Window: The ransom window functions similar to a trade window. The sender (pirate) has options for "empty cargo" and an ISK field to determine what the demands are. The reciever does not have an input field, simply buttons to accept or decline. This is not a negotiation. This is a demand. No combat rules change during any part of this process. Targets can still be shot while proposing or interacting with an open ransom window. While this window is open, every player involved with the ransom is highlighted in local/overview so that the victim is able to determine who in system would be bound to this agreement.
Ransom Accepted? Be on your way! If the target accepts the ransom, the funds are transferred, and if the "empty cargo" option was enabled, all cargo bays, drone bays, and ammunitions are ejected in a ransom can, owned by the players that proposed the ransom. Any drones controlled by the target are removed from their control and considered free salvage.
The sender's target locks on target are deactivated automatically, and the target is given 30 seconds of invulnerability from the now-presumably-richer player or fleet, and is unable to scoop loot or lock targets during this time. This player's invulnerability does not extend to players not highlighted during the ransom window. In short, this is a 30 second window for the player to leave, but it doesn't protect him from the ransom party's friends, other random people in system, etc, nor does it limit the pirates from taking actions other than interacting with the target for that 30 seconds. This 30 second counter may need to be adjusted to be a bit longer for especially large vessels with longer align times but the intent is that it gives the now-poorer victim sufficient time to align and warp out.
There are no Guarantees. Pirates are still pirates. While this formal ransom system gives the victim sufficient info to determine who in system will be forced by it to let them live long enough to warp out in return for their cargo or ISK, there are no mechanisms to prevent the Pirates from utilizing other players warping in from a nearby gate, cyno, or other workarounds to try and catch then with a third party. It is the responsibility of the victim to take such variables in to account when choosing whether or not to submit to a ransom demand. Surrendering to ransoms in wspace is a ludicrously risky endeavor, and surrendering to ransoms in a ship with slower align times is also a bit riskier.
But Muh Killmails! Ransoms shouldn't generate a KM, but it might be fun to have it generate a KM-like document as an additional tab in corp histories that the API could hook in to for bragging rights. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy
11050
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 20:49:57 -
[2] - Quote
Old subject that comes up from time to time.
Here are the issues;
- total invulnerability to everything once a ransom has been "accepted" is a no-no. People will find a way to ransom themselves using alt characters to effectively become invulnerable to actual hostile actions.
- conditional invulnerability would not work either. Not all "outlaws" are officially affiliated with each other. If one outlaw decides to ransom, the other outlaw will not be mechanically obligated to honor it and will blow up the target anyways.
- not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio.
- it is too risky to let a ship live for too long. That industrial may be a trap. Better to kill it first than risk a cyno dropping god knows what on you.
- my experience with ransoms is that victims will sometimes prefer to self destruct their ships and tell everyone to die in real life. Self destruction carries a lower loot drop rate, so it is not in an outlaw's interest to waste time talking to the person.
How did you Veterans start?
|
Iain Cariaba
3345
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 21:24:03 -
[3] - Quote
Out of that entire wall of text, you failed to provide one bit of information?
What's wrong with the player derived non-mechanic we currently use for ransoms?
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
249
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 21:44:52 -
[4] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Out of that entire wall of text, you failed to provide one bit of information?
What's wrong with the player derived non-mechanic we currently use for ransoms?
Absolutely nothing. However, it doesn't incentivize the victim to submit to unknown forces on the promise they won't shoot, and doesn't incentivize the random pirate to ransom the random victim because of how unlikely it is they have any reason to submit.
Or, what I posted under "Y THO"
The formal mechanic version is a supplement, not a replacement for existing methods. |
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
249
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 21:53:17 -
[5] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:- total invulnerability to everything once a ransom has been "accepted" is a no-no. People will find a way to ransom themselves using alt characters to effectively become invulnerable to actual hostile actions. In no way is this proposed here.
ShahFluffers wrote:- conditional invulnerability would not work either. Not all "outlaws" are officially affiliated with each other. If one outlaw decides to ransom, the other outlaw will not be mechanically obligated to honor it and will blow up the target anyways. I do not see a problem with this.A "formal ransom" is not a get out of jail free card as written. It is a "here is a limited time offer from this exact group of people, accept at your own risk" Expecting free passage from all players because one guy let you go for some ISK is silly.
ShahFluffers wrote:- not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio. The existance of a formalized system does not prevent players from continuing to extract sweet, sweet tunes. This system is a suplement to, not a replacement for existing methodologies.
ShahFluffers wrote:- it is too risky to let a ship live for too long. That industrial may be a trap. Better to kill it first than risk a cyno dropping god knows what on you. This was specifically designed to be quick, easy, optional, and unobtrusive. No one is obligated to let that industrial live. If they take too long waffling over acceting the terms, simply continue shooting at them, or don't offer the ransom in the first place. Ransoms are an option, not an imperative. if it looks shady, simply don't ransom it.
ShahFluffers wrote:- my experience with ransoms is that victims will sometimes prefer to self destruct their ships and tell everyone to die in real life. Self destruction carries a lower loot drop rate, so it is not in an outlaw's interest to waste time talking to the person. It takes far longer to self destruct a ship than it takes you to shoot it to death. This is not a determining factor for EVE in general or this system specifically. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3754
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 00:46:06 -
[6] - Quote
So one guy drops fleet, you get ransom including empty cargo and the one guy then kills you and you can't even fight back anymore.... it'll never be accepted except by utter newbies who don't know better because it's just too abusable. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3367
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 01:43:50 -
[7] - Quote
PopeUrban wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Out of that entire wall of text, you failed to provide one bit of information?
What's wrong with the player derived non-mechanic we currently use for ransoms? Absolutely nothing. .
good then lets not screw with it
if something is being done well enough by players already the sand box does not need to be given any more structure in that area. The more devs try to formalizes how we play the less of a sand box it becomes
BLOPS Hauler
|
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
251
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 02:37:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:So one guy drops fleet, you get ransom including empty cargo and the one guy then kills you and you can't even fight back anymore.... it'll never be accepted except by utter newbies who don't know better because it's just too abusable.
Why would you accept it with a nonparticipant hostile showing in local? It'd be a waste of time to send it in that case may as well just kill the guy.
This is exactly the reason said window lights up participants in overview and local. So that the victim has all the information, right then and there, to make a snap decision before the people ransoming him get bored and just decide to shoot him because he took more than ten seconds to make up his mind.
The whole point is that you'd have to at the very least appear to be giving the victim a fair deal if they're going to have any chance of accepting your ransom demands, meaning any sane person wouldn't accept unless everybody but him and his blues in local was lit up as participant. Once its accepted the grace period kicks in. Shuffling around in and out of fleets isn't gonna change that. |
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
251
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 02:45:05 -
[9] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:PopeUrban wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Out of that entire wall of text, you failed to provide one bit of information?
What's wrong with the player derived non-mechanic we currently use for ransoms? Absolutely nothing. . good then lets not screw with it if something is being done well enough by players already the sand box does not need to be given any more structure in that area. The more devs try to formalizes how we play the less of a sand box it becomes
We're not screwing with it.
Point is not that you can't ransom. Point is that the barriers that exist that prevent people from offering/accepting ransom are too steep for the majority of players. When was the last time you heard of anything short of a capital getting ransomed successfully by anyone who didn't hold sov?
The entire point here is, like hauling contracts, to create a system that encourages people that don't already have large corporate infrastructures and a list of verified diplomatic contacts to actually bother to ransom **** because the people they ransom have a reason to believe they'll actually escape with their ship.
It doesn't put anyone in a box. It does create greater incentive to ransom or pay for ransom, but in no way forces people to do so, the same way you can haul cargo based on mail and trust but you'll find people far more likely to haul cargo when there's a system of reasonable guarantees involved, which means more varied content for entities of all sizes and ages. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3369
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 04:03:51 -
[10] - Quote
except eve is largy built and advertised on those purely unregulated social structures and business dealings. it's what makes it feel real.when there is no space magic that compels anyone to keep their word the value of keeping and cost of breaking it is much greater
BLOPS Hauler
|
|
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
253
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 08:06:28 -
[11] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:except eve is largy built and advertised on those purely unregulated social structures and business dealings. it's what makes it feel real.when there is no space magic that compels anyone to keep their word the value of keeping and cost of breaking it is much greater
So we should remove contracts from the game as well then, right? They're basically the aformentioned space magic. |
Kenrailae
mind games. Suddenly Spaceships.
669
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 08:16:53 -
[12] - Quote
This is one of those things that would be cool but it just doesn't work. There is nothing lost to self destruct a ship that is going to die anyway. Best to do it and deny as much to your attackers as possible.
If Eve had death consequences outside of death and losing the stuff, then it might work. But it does not, so this concept, while it would be cool, doesn't work in Eve without messing with Eve's larger picture.
The Law is a point of View
The NPE IS a big deal
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
3251
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 08:53:59 -
[13] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote: - not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio.
This will probably get you a blank-reason ban today since it was determent by famous internet detective Ripart Teg that it violates the Geneva convention and resembles RL torture.
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3005
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 14:32:42 -
[14] - Quote
PopeUrban wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:except eve is largy built and advertised on those purely unregulated social structures and business dealings. it's what makes it feel real.when there is no space magic that compels anyone to keep their word the value of keeping and cost of breaking it is much greater So we should remove contracts from the game as well then, right? They're basically the aformentioned space magic.
Contract offer feature that were un-workable or just a complete disaster. Your ransom in 98% of the case if not more would just happen to be an added tax on being blow-up for newbies who don't understand they will only be protected from the ransom issuer and not the rest of his gang. |
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3005
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 14:34:46 -
[15] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:ShahFluffers wrote: - not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio.
This will probably get you a blank-reason ban today since it was determent by famous internet detective Ripart Teg that it violates the Geneva convention and resembles RL torture.
You are still salty some of your friends got banned over this? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3375
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 17:06:42 -
[16] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:ShahFluffers wrote: - not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio.
This will probably get you a blank-reason ban today since it was determent by famous internet detective Ripart Teg that it violates the Geneva convention and resembles RL torture. You are still salty some of your friends got banned over this?
people that weren't involved are still salty over this
BLOPS Hauler
|
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
3257
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 17:34:54 -
[17] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:ShahFluffers wrote: - not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio.
This will probably get you a blank-reason ban today since it was determent by famous internet detective Ripart Teg that it violates the Geneva convention and resembles RL torture. You are still salty some of your friends got banned over this? No, I am angry if some idiot pushes the metagame to a level beyond any reason just to further his carebear agenda
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
Conogan Blitzkreig
Pod Relocators
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 20:08:25 -
[18] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:ShahFluffers wrote: - not everyone wants loot. Sometimes they want to hear you sing on audio.
This will probably get you a blank-reason ban today since it was determent by famous internet detective Ripart Teg that it violates the Geneva convention and resembles RL torture.
WTF?!?!??!??!??!?!!!!!!! Are you effing SERIOUS?!! Somebody, SOMEBODY, tell me that that crap's not for real. That utter nonsense CANT be real. You mean to tell me that if you try and make somebody sing on TeamSpeak so you'll spare their ship, you can actually get BANNED?!??!??!?! Omg.............. Screw CCP and this game if that's truly the case. That CANT be true..can it?! |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy
11058
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 20:34:42 -
[19] - Quote
Technically it is ban-worthy offense. But I still see and hear people doing it.
I honestly believe that the sentiment is; don't push a person to the point of exploding and then exploit that further. If they are "game" to sing, no harm and no foul. If not, cut em loose.
But this is pure conjecture on my part. You can always file a petition for a more "official" answer.
How did you Veterans start?
|
Conogan Blitzkreig
Pod Relocators
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 20:38:44 -
[20] - Quote
LOL!!! Somebody should make a miner sing "I Feel Pretty" from West Side Story. That'd be awesome. |
|
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3007
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 21:09:01 -
[21] - Quote
Conogan Blitzkreig wrote:LOL!!! Somebody should make a miner sing "I Feel Pretty" from West Side Story. That'd be awesome.
Probably already got done. It either ended with a miner signing and keeping his ship or not signing and not keeping his ship. The reason why the songs never caused huge debates and bans is because it more than likely always just stop there as opposed to an entire laundry list of questionable actions. |
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
513
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 21:42:23 -
[22] - Quote
Meh, who cares.
If this ever goes through, just have the checkbox to auto-decline ransoms right next to the auto-decline of duels.
This way I won't miss checking it.
--Gadget... goin' down fightin'!
Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist
Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."
|
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
257
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 21:48:38 -
[23] - Quote
Thanks for the feedback guys!
The general consensus/problems I see repeated here are "Okay that's a fine thing you've done here but noobs will misunderstand it, so why bother" or "I'd never pay a ransom, in theory, I'd just selft destruct my ship."
On the noob argument: Nobody cares. Noobs misunderstand how CONCORD and flagging works to this day and everyone agrees that gaming systems based on the target's ignorance are an important part of what makes EVE what it is. From suicide ganking to public killright baiting to trap contracts in losec stations and so on. The entire point is to make the ransom system visually simple to understand and interact with so that ransoms can be offered, accepted, or rejected extremely quickly. There was never any intent to make the game easier.
On the self destruct argument: This is a non-issue. If you're self destructing your ship you're effectively refusing to pay a ransom. Anyone willing to self destruct wasn't going to pay anyway, so there's zero interaction between these features in the first place. They've simply saved the guy attempting to extract the ransom a little ammo or time. And that's fine as well. If people never want to pay ransom ever, they are under no obligation to do so, or even respond to ransoms. As Gadget posted there, its as simple as turning off the notifications. |
Conogan Blitzkreig
Pod Relocators
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 23:26:14 -
[24] - Quote
Good idea, I like it. It'll help piracy a lot a think, because it'll legitimize ransoms a lot more. CCP needs to perfect all of both the intentional/set up and emergent professions to make this game work. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
897
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 13:35:18 -
[25] - Quote
Pirates want a better chance of ransom it be on them to make sure thier corp is know for honoring them. That could mean cracking down and weeding out the people who get off on how many posts in C&P they get. Worst case...even giving 2 craps when CEO written saying I paid ransom, your people still killed me. Get known for replies of lol STFU and HFTU...well then when the ransom money is not coming in don't ask why.
Or join pirate crews already famed for this. Some pirate crew I know are no BS honest in their dealings here. Took a long time for them to get here...some I know have been in them. They tend to make sure lol tear collecting on ransom then kill is discouraged.
The invul thing...not of much help. You are getting jumped seconds to minutes later lol. Why I never really saw the point to ransom. Your deal is with those people. Not on the people 3 gates over as you gtfo. And thats assuming same corp...new pirates, no deals of any kind....there you are reransoming. Or...still losing that ship + the lost isk on the prior ransom. But that's me...you got me hard tackled, smacking my ship around and I can't do damn thing really now. Just finish this and lets get on with our nights. |
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
257
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 23:38:41 -
[26] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Pirates want a better chance of ransom it be on them to make sure thier corp is know for honoring them. That could mean cracking down and weeding out the people who get off on how many posts in C&P they get. Worst case...even giving 2 craps when CEO written saying I paid ransom, your people still killed me. Get known for replies of lol STFU and HFTU...well then when the ransom money is not coming in don't ask why.
Or join pirate crews already famed for this. Some pirate crew I know are no BS honest in their dealings here. Took a long time for them to get here...some I know have been in them. They tend to make sure lol tear collecting on ransom then kill is discouraged.
The invul thing...not of much help. You are getting jumped seconds to minutes later lol. Why I never really saw the point to ransom. Your deal is with those people. Not on the people 3 gates over as you gtfo. And thats assuming same corp...new pirates, no deals of any kind....there you are reransoming. Or...still losing that ship + the lost isk on the prior ransom. But that's me...you got me hard tackled, smacking my ship around and I can't do damn thing really now. Just finish this and lets get on with our nights.
Agree with everything you've said, however this whole system is to streamline that process of actually demanding the ransom moreso than it is to ensure the victim gets home safely. The ransom itself becomes a logged event. Pirates who take their reputation seriously like those you mention can see a link to that log if they choose to honor that ransom beyond the terms agreed. No checking intel channels or comms or whatever. If you're a pirate that chooses to garner a "free passage" agreement longer than the short warpout invuln from the ransom party alone, the guy you ransomed can simply ping the ransom mail that was generated, and it's easy to see this happenned one jump over 2 minutes ago.
Making the invuln too powerful simply dumbs down the game, hence the reason the invuln is set up primarily as a guarantor that you'll be able to warp away from the ransomfleet, not that you'll live through the next gate, or be protected from outside forces. Having an invuln that gives the guy being ransomed a reason to consider paying even to entities that are new or unknown to him increases the incentive for groups to offer ransom, and for pilots to accept it.
Nobody on local but the people flashing on your HUD as part of the ransom, and you're one jump away from hisec? You're FAR more likely to accept that ransom if the amount is reasonable (e.g. "we'll let your JF go if you drop your cargo") Even people like yourself or gadget would be much more willing to consider paying out in that situation, and that's kinda the point. It encourages people to offer a fair deal that you have a bulletproof guarantee is fair in certain situations, meaning more potential people involved with that type of play.
Only being ransomed by one guy with three of his corpmates in system unflashy, and you still need to make six more jumps through probable camps? Well **** that, you'd have to be insane to accept or even look at that ransom.
Point is it encourages newer pirates to offer the fair deal because of slightly increased assurances, and lets pirates offer/accept ransoms much faster than the chat methods. In many cases the time it takes to extract ransoms in hostile FW systems and such are simply unmanagable. Every second you spend typing or waiting for that guy to send you ISK is a second his allies could quite easily be scanning down the plex you're in. |
Conogan Blitzkreig
Pod Relocators
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.09 00:05:10 -
[27] - Quote
Very good idea. I seriously hope it gets looked at and then implemented. |
Conogan Blitzkreig
Pod Relocators
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 22:08:32 -
[28] - Quote
OMG save EvE. |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Plexodus
373
|
Posted - 2016.12.16 04:05:53 -
[29] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Out of that entire wall of text, you failed to provide one bit of information?
What's wrong with the player derived non-mechanic we currently use for ransoms?
Because why would I trust someone to let me go after I've paid them?
As one who is a fan of trying to ransom targets, it's almost always a no due to lack of a guarantee.
Yes, real world, bla bla. It is an incentive, and would be a good one. |
Conogan Blitzkreig
Pod Relocators
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.17 02:15:53 -
[30] - Quote
If CCP doesn't implement this idea, they failz0rz. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |